ORDER :

V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

1. The petitioner is the owner of the property situated at S.No.107/5, Kaguanur Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District. Abutting his property on the northern side is a layout promoted by one M/s. Pushpam Realty. The said M/s. Pushpam Realty had developed the layout in S. No. 112/1 and 112/2A, 2B, 3C and 3D1.

2. The petitioner asserts that as a condition for approval of layout, the developer had executed a Gift-deed in favour of the 1st respondent-Panchayat. By the said deed, he hands over the roads, parks and other common amenities in favour of the 1st respondent. After the layout had been developed and sold, the villa owners took possession of the same. The access of the petitioner to his property is through a 30 feet road running between Plot Nos. 37 and 38 to 45 and 30. To the shock and surprise of the petitioner, certain persons have raised a wall across the public road. Aggrieved by the said act, the petitioner approached the respondents by way of a notice dated 24.07.2025, requesting immediate action against the constructions. Though the notices were received on 28.07.2025, no action was initiated. Hence, the petitioner, yet again approached the authorities by way of a representation dated 24.09.2025, which was received by the 1st respondent on 07.10.2025, and by the respondents 2 and 3 on 06.10.2025. These repeated representations, to remove the obstructions across the public road had fell on deaf ears. Hence, the petitioner is before this court by way of a mandamus.

3. When the matter came up for admission on 20.11.2025, Mr.T.Chezhian, learned Additional Government Pleader, took notice for the 1st and 2nd respondents and Mr.R.Kishore Kumar took notice for the 3rd respondent.

4. Mr.T.Chezhian submitted that the Block Development Officer, along with the Inspector of Police, was to cause an inspection on 20.11.2025 and hence, sought for time to report the result of the inspection. Hence, I listed the matter for hearing today.

5. When I took up the matter today, Mr.T.Chezhian reported that a wall had, in fact, been constructed between the plot Nos. 37 and 38.

6. For ready understanding, the approved layout plan is scanned and extracted hereunder:-

……

7. Mr.T.Chezhian pleads that the 1st respondent has written to the Hosur Tahsildar to survey the said area and to take appropriate action.

8. I heard Ms.Vidya for the petitioner and Mr.T.Chezhian for the 1st and 2nd respondents and Mr.Kishore Kumar for the 3rd respondent.

9. Under Section 131 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, the legislature has declared that there cannot be any obstruction over public roads.

10. Section 131 (1) reads as:-

“No person is entitled to build any wall or erect any fence or cause obstruction or projection or make any encroachment whatsoever, whether permanent or temporary over a public road or any property vested in or belonging to or regulated or owned by, a Village Panchayat or Panchayat Union Council.”

11. The Section engrafts in itself, exceptions in terms of G.O. Ms.No.150, Rural Development (C4), dated 21.07.1999, enabling the grant of permission under certain circumstances. The rule which has been contemplated by the said G.O. is titled as the Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Licensing Of Pandals And Temporary Structures on Road Margins vested in the Highways and Rural Works Department in Village Panchayat Areas) Rules, 1999. Rule 2 speaks about the grant of license for erecting a temporary structure and a panchayat is entitled to grant a license for such temporary obstructions, when it relates to the conduct of any fair or festival, in the village. Even in such cases, the permission cannot exceed a maximum period of three days. Reflecting the prohibition under Section 131, Rule 9 of the said Rules direct that no masonry or permanent structures can be erected on a public road, except by the village panchayat or the Highways and Rural Works Department or Public Works Department.

12. Even if a temporary license is granted, and it con